Thread by @DrPetra

Today’s #ResearchTip is when an unethical and alarming piece of research is identified, don’t let your scramble to be part of an exciting drama mean you amplify problems or act unethically yourself.

This 🧵 is about ways to respond to unethical publications #AcademicTwitter

There is a paper, published in a qualitative journal, that is currently raising concerns and questions about how it was published. It's grim and extreme. But it's sadly not unique. There are countless examples of unethical research out there /2 #AcademicTwitter #AcademicChatter

Most of the time unethical research is stopped by good teaching and supervision (either explaining not to do it, or catching and halting it). Other places like ethics committees, participants, colleagues or reviewers can spot and prevent harm spreading /3 #AcademicTwitter

But sometimes research is published and either later exposed as being fraudulent, incorrect in its conclusions, or the researcher(s) or their research was prejudiced or otherwise harmful. Here you'd expect a retraction /4 #AcademicTwitter #AcademicChatter #HigherEd #gradschool

When this happens, the systemic reasons why unethical and harmful work was done and shared need investigating as it runs from the original idea being allowed to proceed all the way through to peer review and publication /5 #AcademicChatter #AcademicTwitter #gradschool #HigherEd

Sometimes it is a breakdown at all levels, the scholar's problematic idea and misconduct. Their supervisors involvement (or inaction). The role (or lack) of an ethics committee. What reviewer(s) and editor(s) did or didn't do /6 #AcademicChatter #AcademicTwitter #gradschool

Sometimes only a few of these things break, but it's still a problem. For example the scholar does something wrong, but their supervisor and ethics committee don't know (because they didn't tell them). Or publishers assume checks were in place (that weren't) #AcademicTwitter

This is why 'ethics' isn't just a rubber stamp from a committee. It should underpin all aspects of our work and be our responsibility throughout, supported by others around us. Lots of people don't know or care about this. Hence causing harm /8 #AcademicTwitter #AcademicChatter

When an unethical piece of research emerges, it's our responsibility as a research community to identify, challenge, investigate and address it. Supporting anyone adversely harmed. Those actions also need to be ethical, proportionate, and not spread alarm or amplify distress /9

You'll notice ethical practitioners in this recent case and others like it. They note the problem in ways that explain but don't escalate. They privately approach key people involved. They protect anyone that could be further upset. Their focus?Harm reduction /10 #AcademicTwitter

That's because unethical research has implications in many ways but can especially increase risk and danger to victims of abuse, perpetuate prejudice, cause or worsen mental distress, or mislead during moments of political or health crises /11 #AcademicChatter #AcademicTwitter

What is an unethical response to the discovery of unethical research? Understandable reactions (in some ways), but unhelpful ones. Excitement! Rumour mongering. Badmouthing. Gossip. Amplifying drama. Further breaches of confidentiality. /12 #AcademicChatter #AcademicTwitter

When an alarming and unethical piece of research is shared, what are the signs you're making a bad situation worse? /13 #AcademicChatter #AcademicTwitter #HigherEd #PhDChat #PhDHelp #gradschool #MedEd

- You share the paper with no warning or caveats.
That may be on social media, via email, or in a journal club. Not alerting people to sensitive or distressing topics is poor practice - and that applies even more strongly when said research is unethical /14 #AcademicTwitter

- You're publicly desperate to join in the drama.
It's human nature to be curious but can make you seem unsympathetic to observers if you're eager to find research because it's controversial. And further embarrass or upset you when you do read said research /15 #AcademicTwitter

- You treat it like a joke.
We often deal with difficult or sensitive topics with humour, and there can be funny sides to upsetting situations. But victims may find your reactions further traumatising. They may connect you with the harmful research /16 #AcademicTwitter #HigherEd

- You use an unethical situation to dismiss what you don't understand.
That may be particular areas of study,methods, analysis, theories etc that *aren't* the problem but you assume they are, because you dislike the idea of them or they're not familiar to you /17 #AcademicTwitter

In this current case people have already dismissed ethnography, sex research, porn studies, reflexivity, philosophy, first person accounts and studying sensitive topics (CSA) as irrelevant, inappropriate,or unscholarly. That is neither a fair or appropriate response /18 #HigherEd

- You cast doubt on researchers using methods you don't understand
Related to the above, people studying sensitive subjects already face stigma and challenges. Unethical research in said fields makes their job harder. Don't add to it with mocking or shaming /19 #AcademicTwitter

You use unethical research as case studies for teaching - for the sake of controversy.
Already I've seen countless "hahaha! can't wait for this to be our next journal club!" responses. Obviously topical issues will generate more interest, but care is needed /20 #AcademicTwitter

Complex, sensitive and distressing research can be used as study examples but only if you know
- the methods involved
- a lot about research ethics
- how to support a class with a challenging topic
Otherwise you risk perpetuating or increasing harms beyond the bad research /21

- Speculation
Dangerously unethical research is a result of systemic failures. Until it's investigated/confirmed you cannot be sure whether supervisors,ethics committees or universities knew of a researcher's harmful actions. Avoid unsubstantiated accusations /22 #AcademicTwitter

- Snitch tagging
This is for social media, but there is no need for you to hunt out individuals that may/may not be related to a case of poor research and tag them into conversations. In cases of risk or danger you can greatly inflame situations by doing this /23 #AcademicTwitter

This also applies to other people discussing topics - or worse still victims you know who've experienced issues related to the harmful research. They don't need to be non-consensually dragged into a drama of *your* making /24 #AcademicTwitter #HigherEd

If you want to report harmful research, or report on it or discuss it you can do so offline first and then, when cases are clearer, report and name individuals as appropriate. It avoids bringing in people that aren't involved and could be distressed/targeted /25 #AcademicTwitter

- Prejudiced opportunism
bringing completely unrelated minoritised groups into a case of damaging and unethical research that has *nothing to do with said group whatsoever* is unfair, unethical and increases danger to others /26 #AcademicTwitter #HigherEd

This current case has, in part,gathered attention because homophobic and anti trans accounts are sharing it for their own nefarious reasons. As a scholar you do not want to be involved. You can challenge unethical research while not amplifying or leading hate /27 #AcademicTwitter

- Disproportionate reactions
You don't need to go to the police because someone on social media said a journal published something bad. Even if the thing was terrible. It doesn't require you to file and brag about a police report. /28 #AcademicTwitter #HigherEd #AcademicChatter

- Dismissing distress
When sensitive topics are discussed people will react in many ways, more so if unethically dangerous research is conducted. Either support people to have said conversations, ignore, or signpost to help. Don't shame, dismiss or stigmatise /29 #AcademicTwitter

- Remember if you've a scholarly social media account people will see you as part of academia
They won't get the nuance that it's not your field or you're just making light of a topic. They'll judge your public reaction as part of the wider case. Don't make it worse /30

We often see ourselves as separate from a situation and human nature + social media can be a heady mix with a thrilling yet awful scenario. Pause, consider what you're adding. Discuss, but sensitively and with care /31 #AcademicTwitter #HigherEd #AcademicChatter #PhDChat #MedEd

Question: “can we act differently with friends?”

We’re human, so informal conversations with friends aren’t going to be like formalised teaching or sharing online. We may express things more strongly but if we’re discussing harm then other peoples respect and dignity matters

Question: “are you saying we shouldn’t identify unethical researchers?”

No. It can be hugely important to identify malpractice and those who do it. But we need to be certain who the person is and ensure it doesn’t detract from wider criticisms and holding systems accountable.

It is also worth noting sometimes people act in bad faith or for their own personal reasons that mean negative reactions and a lot of public fuss benefits or excites them. So not naming and giving attention may be more appropriate in those cases.

Question: “this tells me humanities departments should be closed”

That’s a ridiculous assertion. One unethical piece of research isn’t representative of an entire method, sub discipline, department or field. However people seem eager to silence humanities. We should focus on why

Question: "I knew a lot of these things but not all. Why don't ethics classes teach it?"

Because the majority of research ethics training is poor. More likely to spend time focusing on a shocking case study than nuanced, complex and personal responsibilities of ethical research.

Question: "are you suggesting we shouldn't use this in a journal club?"

Yes. Plenty of other papers to pick from. If you're highly experienced in understanding ethics and exploring sensitive research with a pre-warned and consenting group, then maybe. But really? Avoid it.

Remember when I said some people were using this research for dubious purposes (particularly to attack the humanities)? Bingo!

https://twitter.com/NeilDotObrien/status/1557236449786957824?s=20&t=9HpjCfI8crTqdn4dfg51bQ

Zero evidence about funding sources. Unlikely UK and particularly local constituents paying for it. No evidence of whether uni was aware of this awful, indefensible research. But taking one example of bad research to try and discredit anything that isn't STEM? Worrying behaviour.

Here's another aspect to when someone does unethical and harmful research, people who've no clue about research nor care for education or ethics, bandwaggon it for their own purposes. And that harms scholars while ignoring victims. Really unpleasant, cynical and opportunistic.

The ripples that spread when someone does unethical research go very far. And when we're teaching about ethics we should be alert to and addressing *all of this*.

I should clarify as it’s not always apparent that when I’m saying “no evidence” that doesn’t mean there isn’t any. It means at this point there are many things that are very clear, and a lot that isn’t clear and being investigated. As more information becomes available I’ll share

ps. This is a (very) long thread so I’ll put it on LinkedIn later for anyone that wants to use in teaching. Separately when sensitive and upsetting topics in threads like this get shared a whole load of attention seekers show up. You’ll notice I don’t engage, you shouldn’t either

Question: “do you think it’s fair this paper was published when so many other people haven’t had their research published?”

It’s unfair. Another effect of publishing dangerously unethical research is inequality and unfairness. Minoritised scholars are more likely to be impacted.

Question: “why are you more bothered about the references than child abuse?”

The point of this thread ⬆️ is prioritising victims and survivors. I’ve not mentioned citations. Since you have, for the paper in question, there are ethical issues about who is cited and for what goal.

In particular using Audre Lorde to justify a study on CSA is distasteful, inaccurate, inappropriate and potentially distressing for readers. Other citations are misplaced or misused which a reviewer (and supervisor, if aware) should’ve spotted.

Question: “if I wanted to address ethic issues in a paper how would you recommend to do it?Do I need an IRB to say what to look for?”

You don’t need an IRB (Institutional Review Board) to tell you, but many do provide training and guidance so if you have access to that, use it.

The way I address ethics is firstly to note everyone involved (researcher, participants, supervisor, ethics committee, funder, recipients/audience, reviewers, employers etc) and note how bad research would impact on each - and how they relate to one another.

I also go through every part of a publication and wider discussions about it (including on social media) and note where there are dangers, errors, potential points of risk and harm. I consider if anyone else has raised concerns in the past and what I would do to prevent or fix.

Question: “I was rejected by that journal but they published this??!!!! Should I appeal?”

If you think a journal has unfairly rejected your paper always appeal. Not just because of this case. Discuss with colleagues, keep receipts. We know minoritised scholars suffer more here.

Question: “do you have any advice for survivors?”

I understand if the paper,reactions to it and wider discussions have frightened and upset you. It might be going offline,taking comfort with loved ones, and seeking support helps. NAPAC are good to talk to napac.org.uk